Skip to comments.The Washington Post Bullies Romney
Posted on 05/16/2012 3:58:08 AM PDT by Kaslin
When it comes to opposition research, there is often only one difference between a candidate's vicious negative ad and an "investigative" news report: the undeserved patina of media "objectivity" and respectability.
Take the Washington Post's Jason Horowitz's 5,400-word "expose" on how Mitt Romney may have pinned a boy down and cut his hair in 1965. 1965? That's almost a half century ago. Even if every detail were accurate -- and they weren't -- a journalist could pull a muscle in the hyper-aggressive attempt to make it somehow relevant to the present moment or even the recent past.
The family of the alleged Romney victim, John Lauber, who died of cancer in 2004, issued a statement saying, "the portrayal of John is factually incorrect and we are aggrieved that he would be used to further a political agenda." One sister said, "If he were still alive today, he would be furious" about the story. None of this slowed down the Post one bit and didn't stop everyone else from repeating the story.
So how hard was it to learn the allegation was false? Wasn't this the story? Who was spreading the falsehood?
This is the same "investigative" crew that expended 3,000 words last October explaining that a rock at a Rick Perry rental property had the N-word painted on it. Never mind this was about 25 years ago; never mind you couldn't see it because it was covered in white paint; and never mind that the painting over the N-word was done by Perry's family. The reader was supposed to know that it was somehow very relevant to the presidential campaign.
The Romney prep-school "prank" scandal is reminiscent of an old 1996 report on Pat Buchanan on ABC's "Nightline." Then anchor Ted Koppel not only suggested Buchanan's father was a regular listener to the anti-Semitic radio show of Father Coughlin (he later apologized when the family denied this), he even stooped to accusing Buchanan's little brothers of having beaten up Jewish kids in the neighborhood in the 1950s.
Koppel tried to put these spurious allegations "in context" for the viewer: "It's not that Pat Buchanan today is associated with overtly anti-Semitic or racist acts or statements, but rather that he has created an image of someone who might be sympathetic to such acts or statements by others."
Who, precisely, was "creating the image" of prejudice and mean-spiritedness? Why do journalists never take responsibility for their mudslinging? They just pretend someone else did it. In the same way, the Post and other reporters are creating a negative image of Romney as "a rich kid with a mean streak" who has apparently never matured.
The Post defends itself by calling its reporting "solid," and that they found Romney classmates who would tell this tale. Yet they somehow are more credible than the very family of the alleged victim. This is not just about inaccuracy, but it's about irrelevance. Somehow the "character" of Republican contenders is always a question mark that requires sleuthing of their teenage years for signs of disturbing misbehavior.
The Post knows full well that they never did this kind of investigation for Barack Obama in 2008. Take Obama's admissions of teenaged marijuana and cocaine use in his memoirs. Did the Post send a reporter to find out from Obama's classmates how often he used illegal drugs and where he purchased them?
No. The Post tried to assert these troublesome admissions wouldn't matter in a story published a month before he announced he was running and never returned to investigate. Reporter Lois Romano declared, "Obama's partisan opponents and experts said it is too early to know whether the admissions will be a liability because the public seems to be enthusiastically embracing his openness at this point."
Do you think if Romney openly professed having bullied kids in high school that the media would report the public seems to be "enthusiastically embracing his openness"?
Obama wasn't the only candidate the Post utterly failed to vet in 2008. Did the Post offer 5,000 words on John Edwards cheating on his dying wife -- in real time, as an adult presidential candidate? Then Post reporter Howard Kurtz admitted, "The whispered allegations about John Edwards were an open secret that was debated in every newsroom and reported by almost none."
It's bias like this that causes people to cancel their newspaper subscriptions. Sadly, these Posties are so delusional as to believe that their fallen-away subscribers prefer hackneyed bloggers and talk-radio hosts over this elitist garbage.
They can't see that what they're publishing here in this Romney-prank story is clouded, unconfirmed ancient history -- maybe even mythology -- that none of them would ever "report" on the worst of the Democrats. No one believes this newspaper's claims of objectivity and fairness. No one should.
Romney apologized already.
There were several witnesses.
Shame on Romney to pretend that HE is the victim.
The thing is...based on all the rules of what you put on the front page....this just wasn’t front-page material. At best, page three material. Then this reporter goes onto write like 5k words on this whole episode....which amazes me that you can draw this out to such a length.
Imagine a couple of guys today in some Houston school....cutting a kid’s hair like this, and some local reporter putting this on page one (won’t ever happen) and then writing more than 1k words on this (would never happen).
In the end, you’ve got wannabe journalists working for the Post, and pretending to be in the same league as Paul Harvey or Edward R Murrow. I’d send them back to the college newspaper or push them to retrain as used-car salesmen.
Sign of a dying newspaper.
It can’t happen soon enough
Your "hatred" for romney might be deserved . . . but its blinding you and others here who in "part" is the real enemy.
Your comments and thought process is allowing the soross' of the world not hold accountable those that are doing evil.
I pray I dont have to explain that simple concept to you.
But you know what? The Marxist Media sucks more. These guys give Obama not only a pass on EVERYTHING, but even a God-damned HALO on a magazine cover. Literally.
I probably won't be nudged into feeling sympathy for Romney based on these surreal 'attacks', but I understand if others are.
'Comments' do not permit evil.
Want to know what does? Want to see evil?
The McCain/Palin ticket was up ++4 to 10 pts
in some polls, days prior to Election 2008.
So rather than helping the GOP, Romney and
TeamROMNEY and the RNME (Republican National Media Establishment)
decided to attack Gov. Palin to throw Election2008.
Romney, and the Van der Sloot RNME RINOs for Obama in 2008
Late in October, The American Spectator's The Prowler revealed:
"Former Mitt Romney presidential campaign staffers
have been involved in spreading anti-Palin spin to reporters, seeking to diminish her standing after the election.
'Sarah Palin is a lightweight, she won't be the first, not even the third, person people will think of when it comes to 2012,'
says one former Romney aide
'The only serious candidate ready to challenge to lead the Republican Party is Mitt Romney.
"Some former Romney aides were behind the recent leaks to media, including CNN, that Governor Sarah Palin was a 'diva' and was going off message intentionally."
The Palmetto Scoop reported: "One of the first stories to hit the national airwaves was
the claim of a major internal strife between close McCain aides and the folks handling his running mate Sarah Palin."
"Im told by very good sources that this was indeed the case and that a rift had developed, but it was between Palins people and the staffers brought on from the failed presidential campaign of former Gov. Mitt Romney, not McCain aides."
"The sources said nearly 80 percent of Romneys former staff was absorbed by McCain and these individuals were responsible for what amounts to a premeditated, last-minute sabotage of Palin."
aides loyal to Romney inside the McCain campaign, said The Scoop, reportedly saw
that Palin would be a serious contender for the Republican nomination in 2012 or 2016, which made her a threat to another presidential quest by Romney.
"These staffers are now out trying to finish her off .hoping it would ingratiate themselves with Mitt Romney."
"Who's the Palin Leaker from the McCain Campaign?
National Review Online The publication of a Vanity Fair profile of Sarah Palin
appears to have opened old wounds in the McCain campaign.
... the source of the Diva leak was Nicolle Wallaces husband."
So, when will you be joining the Obama campaign?
There is no longer even one primary candidate, opposing Romney. Pick a lane.
Take a look at that recent Post poll that has Romney in the lower 40s, and Obama in the upper 30s (among registered voters).
This is not a contest of two guys who want to win ~ this is clearly a contest seen by the public as a "RACE TO THE BOTTOM".
I simply do not understand why the GOP-e, and their now willing accomplices outside of that circle, think they have to match the Democrats LOSER FOR LOSER.
We can do better.
In other news, the fox has checked in and reports the henhouse is doing fine.
Piling on = 4 more 4 O.
This is perhaps the sanest message I have ever had from you. :) I agree with it.
So YOU back Romney’s RomneyCARE, Romney’s death panels,
Romney’s flipflops, Romney’s judges’, Romney’fees,
Romney’s support of TARP and Sharia,
Romney’s support of the BIG DIG coverup, etc.
YOU ARE ALREADY ON OBAMA’s CAMPAIGN.
However its obvious we are fighting a multi front war. Planned? I do believe so. Have no doubt Soros is with Romney in "some" aspect.
In "global" financing such as Bain, one develops many strange bedfellows and incestuous relationships. Unavoidable
However, recognize each specific battle for what it is.
If one condones bad behavior and misrepresentation of the main stream media because they are attacking someone we not like, despise and probably deserve . . . how does that make us better than them?
What is your plan to “do better” at this point in the process? There’s an election now just 172 days away.
I was an early supporter of Palin. I’m not your enemy.
We have, what we have. Romney was ruthless, and I do not like him either.
However he’s proven to be a successful competitor. And he won, fair and square. Palin took herself out of the race. As much as I would like things to have gone otherwise, one must play the cards we’re dealt.
Romney is, who we have to work with now.
Pick a lane. Once Romney evicts Obama, then we can work at evicting Romney in 2016.
Keep in mind, the press will not be putting halos around Romney’s head, on magazine covers.
Romney will be a one-termer.
Then we can elect Palin. Presuming we can draft her to run then. Her kids will be older, and more aware of the world. It could happen, IMO.
Right now, we have an election to win.
INterestingly enough at that period of time if you wore long hair (particularly if you bleached it) you were thought to be a no good California surfer bum....lots of young men ended up being held down and getting a hair cut they may not have wanted. Life went on.
But the issue of this thread is the Washington Post!
So now because you napalm the conversation with Obama same as Romney there can be no serious discussion regarding the thread and we all walk away,
Now who won?
The media and soros or you?
BTW, I've been pushing the race to the bottom idea since way back last Fall when Romney was having a hard time breaking 20% ~ when he had even Michele Bachmann and Pawlenty as his only competition.
It's all coming true ~ we HAVE to find something better. Else it's beginning to look like we may have a Twelfth Amendment situation:
"The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. "
No, not in Virginia. His boys here made a last minute rule change that tossed the primary to Romney.
That is called CHEATING. This was Romney's first real test of personal ethics and he failed by NOT rejecting the result.
The man didn't win "Fair and Square" ~ he's a cheater, a liar, and a coward.
The majority of the other candidates were clearly RINOS ~ no matter how you define that term. I've gone over their qualifications several times.
Their purpose was simply to distract primary voters from the purpose of narrowing the race down to qualified Conservative candidates.
My grandfather listened to Fr. Coughlin’s radio show . . . back in the ‘30s. I guess I can never run for office.
It’s “The Washington Post.” That’s all you need to know.